|
Post by High Sierra Fan on Aug 13, 2015 18:22:03 GMT -8
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2015 19:21:20 GMT -8
Lots of wildlife is killed in Yellowstone National Park each year by motorists who neglect to adhere to the 45 mph speed limit. It is a big problem. Wolves have been documented dispersing hundreds of miles and mountain lions dispersing thousands of miles. They are intelligent animals that seem to me far more aware of the dangers near roads and highways than are their favored prey such as elk and deer. But the predators' numbers are limited.
I've seen mountain lions cross roads in front of me on several occasions — usually in a burst of speed. Yet in my own area, both dispersing wolves and mountain lions have fallen victim to vehicle collisions. It's a reminder of what a serious impediment human thoroughfares can become to genetic exchange among sub-populations of a species.
|
|
BigLoad
Trail Wise!
Pancakes!
Posts: 12,942
|
Post by BigLoad on Aug 13, 2015 19:30:25 GMT -8
This year I read twelve black bears have been killed in the roads within Yosemite to date. They can have some of ours. Today's paper had a photo of bear with five cubs strolling through a neighboring town.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2015 19:30:52 GMT -8
Lots of wildlife is killed in Yellowstone National Park each year by motorists who neglect to adhere to the 45 mph speed limit. There could be more to it than that. I was in the eastern part of Yosemite, driving through the park, going east at 0300 hrs. I was probably going 20 MPH when I accidentally ran over a porcupine trying to cross the road. No, I didn't get a flat tire. -Don- SSF, CA
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2015 19:37:19 GMT -8
Lots of wildlife is killed in Yellowstone National Park each year by motorists who neglect to adhere to the 45 mph speed limit. There could be more to it than that. . . Oh, I'm sure there is more to it than that, but the fact remains that a motorist has a better chance of avoiding a collision if he or she is not speeding. And lots of people in Yellowstone break the speed limit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2015 21:05:27 GMT -8
Oh, I'm sure there is more to it than that, but the fact remains that a motorist has a better chance of avoiding a collision if he or she is not speeding. And lots of people in Yellowstone break the speed limit. I agree with the first part, however, when I drove through Yellowstone several years ago, it seemed to me that everybody was doing the 45 MPH limit, even less at some places. -Don-
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2015 21:31:56 GMT -8
Oh, I'm sure there is more to it than that, but the fact remains that a motorist has a better chance of avoiding a collision if he or she is not speeding. And lots of people in Yellowstone break the speed limit. I agree with the first part, however, when I drove through Yellowstone several years ago, it seemed to me that everybody was doing the 45 MPH limit, even less at some places.-Don- And how fast were you driving? Seriously, you think NO one was speeding? Believe it or not, Yellowstone is one stop sign away from me and a six-hour drive. I persistently drive 45 in the Park, and just as persistently 5 cars pile up on my rear bumper between most any of regular pullouts. Now if so much traffic were driving less than 45 mph, you'd think I would be catching up to them instead of them catching up to me. But that is rarely if ever the way it works. But I suppose I could go searching for some traffic research if you hold your argument so dearly as that.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2015 21:42:41 GMT -8
Here's a NPS review of Grand Teton National Park, just south of Yellowstone. It includes the following statement on wildlife deaths: [/span], particularly at night when drivers exceeded the range of their headlights. Motorists who overdrive their high beams-when the stopping distance is greater than the headlight illumination distance-are less able to stop or slow down with the sudden appearance of an animal on the road. Drivers are cautioned to observe posted speed limits and even reduce their speed, especially at night. [/ul] Do you suppose all those drivers become suddenly conscientious about their speed as soon as they cross from Teton to Yellowstone?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 13, 2015 23:41:04 GMT -8
And how fast were you driving? Seriously, you think NO one was speeding? I was in a RV and was almost always below the speed limit. But I often had cars in front of me, going the same speed as me. I didn't see any speeders when I went through. Same when I was in Teton (where we stayed for a couple of days & nights). That was in the month of September, six years ago, IIRC. Not that it means much, as it was only one time. I will take your word for it that you find a lot of speeders there. Of course you will see more there than I ever would. Besides, there are people from all over the country that go to Yellowstone, so obviously not all will obey every speed law. But if speeding is a real problem there, they need better enforcement. BTW, wasn't there two speed limits, 35 MPH in areas where more people were common? Or am I thinking of somewhere else, such as Teton? -Don- SFS, CA
|
|
|
Post by tipiwalter on Aug 14, 2015 4:37:59 GMT -8
I guess to accommodate fat Americans the national park honchos encourage so-called motor nature loops and RV roads so that we can get our nature fixes while expending no calories. Closing the roads in these parks would help wildlife, reduce smog and noise pollution (and road kills), and fight in a small way congestive heart disease in rolling couch potatoes who could otherwise be walking.
The policy of Multi-Use Access is the worst idea ever conceived by Park officials. It shows our addiction to rolling and car travel and our lazy need to reach places "unearned" i.e. gaining a mountaintop while driving and not hiking. Mt Washington comes to mind. Clingmans Dome comes to mind. Grandfather Mt in NC comes to mind.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2015 7:38:37 GMT -8
. . . The policy of Multi-Use Access is the worst idea ever conceived by Park officials. . . . I believe the notion of Multiple Use originated with the Forest Service rather than the Park Service. And the national parks in question are not exactly multiple use. Regardless, some of the biggest obstacles to wildlife dispersal — such as in the case of the mountain lion P-32 — are neither national park nor national forest in origin.
|
|
|
Post by starwalker on Aug 14, 2015 7:53:50 GMT -8
One of our trips to Yellowstone brought one of those "how stupid can you be" moments. We were in our car, going the speed limit in Lamar Valley approaching a dip in the road. There were buffalo around, so we were being careful (that would be me since I was driving). A sports car goes flying around us, gets to the top of the dip, and his brake lights come on and he comes to a screeching halt a foot or so from a bull buffalo. The buffalo looked down at the car as if to say, "Go ahead, make my day!"
Around our house, deer are the major threat to driver safety. I had to drive to the house this morning from work and almost hit two fawns crossing the road. White-tail deer breed like rabbits around here.
|
|
|
Post by tipiwalter on Aug 14, 2015 7:56:56 GMT -8
. . . The policy of Multi-Use Access is the worst idea ever conceived by Park officials. . . . I believe the notion of Multiple Use originated with the Forest Service rather than the Park Service. And the national parks in question are not exactly multiple use. In my opinion if a Park has a road going thru it along with snowmobile allowances and hiking/backpacking and horseback riding it's multi-use. Yellowstone has many miles of roads. Here's a neato quote: "Yellowstone has taken no steps to minimize road kill. In fact, it has made road improvements which have led to higher vehicle speeds, such as widening roads and increasing the number of pull-outs for slower traffic. The park had no record of any study or planning on the issue, aside from reviews required under the Endangered Species Act." This source is here--- www.nationalparkstraveler.com/2013/08/peer-national-park-service-fault-visitors-leave-lot-roadkill-their-wake23693
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 14, 2015 8:40:57 GMT -8
In my opinion if a Park has a road going thru it along with snowmobile allowances and hiking/backpacking and horseback riding it's multi-use. Yellowstone has many miles of roads. Unfortunately, we don't each get to define a legal term, and make it stick, according to our own whims. And "multiple use" is defined by US law (See The US Code, Title 43, §1702 and Title 16, §528.) It's fine with me if the roads in Yellowstone are done away with — and with them, any road you yourself have ever used to drive to a trailhead. And while we are proposing unrealistic terms, why not do away with all cities also? But all these flights of imagination miss the point of the topic. It is not just roads in national parks that inhibit wildlife dispersal and migration. The mountain lion P-32 was not killed in a national park.
|
|
johnnyray
Trail Wise!
Argle-Bargle, Jiggery-Pokery, and Applesauce
Posts: 2,050
|
Post by johnnyray on Aug 14, 2015 9:55:44 GMT -8
The fact roads segment wildlife habitat is nothing new, better planning can help but again cost and ignorance seem to win out most of the time. Found examples of animal bridges here. bit.ly/1N7Mu7w I also recall a project in WY. to help with antelope and elk migration by removing fences, bit.ly/1N7N5Gg
|
|